The value of opinions to the self

Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 15 July 2016 - 11:11 PM

This topic has been nagging at me for a while and I just can't seem to be satisfied with just letting it go and doing better things with my time but hey with all the time I've been wasting not doing more entertaining things with my life as a result of headaches and low energy and inconsistent weather I might as well get it out of the way.

@ Blue Leafeon:(10 July 2016 - 10:39 AM)I just want everyone to get along. Not that THAT will ever happen.

@ Blue Leafeon:(10 July 2016 - 10:38 AM)I don't like political crap, either

(shoutbox, so read from bottom to top)

Well, to start off, I'd like to mention a concept known as actor-observer bias. In short, (because you are not going to read that citation and neither am I) everything you do yourself is going to have more excuses involved for why you do something, whereas everything someone else does is going to have you presume they did that because that's just how they are. (This mentality can be reversed in some situations, especially when low self-esteem and guilt is involved.) This is essentially the details in what goes into being self-centered, and is also why empathy is supposed to be about putting yourself in another's shoes, to attempt to pretend the other is you, the actor, instead of looking at them as someone else. Humans are supposed to be so self-centered they cannot see anyone as a real person that they can't think of as being themselves.

That will also be the only psychological term I will be using, because while I could absolutely be a condescending smart aleck about it, I only want to use information that I can personally attest to.

Now the point I will address is as to if this is truly the problem as Blue Leafeon describes. I think we must recognize that a self-centered nature is a necessity for individuality to sustain itself, that it is a defense mechanism and a very important one. This is because we are vulnerable to social influence, also known as culture.

There are two sources on which people will develop their beliefs and behavior on, those being:

Culture - Behavior that works off of second-hand information; imitation and faith

Experience - Behavior that works off of first-hand information and the foundation of resistance to the former, if contradictory

Spoiler

As a disclaimer I feel the need to mention that this post, nor any of my other posts, are meant for the purpose of getting you to think the way I do. That would honestly be a pretty bad idea as I'm the kind of person that would set out to kill a perfect clone of myself. I welcome opposition to the claims made in this post for informative purposes, especially if you believe it has come from a misinformed angle. I may not actually be convinced of the truth of what you have to say, but it will at least serve to have me look further into my own beliefs.

Now, if you are to ask me, keeping in mind that I am very much outside of the norm and an extremist in thought(because of my particularly high resistance to social influence), the reason why the human tendency to avoid listening to someone else is actually exacerbated as a flaw is primarily because they actually allow too much social influence to affect them, and have come to a point where their trust is primarily in second-hand information because they don't have enough first-hand information to work off of. As politics are the apex of social games (conveniently sorted out with labeled teams) and almost all morality is formed from second-hand information, this shows itself at its worst there more than anywhere else.

Let's have a look at this video's information for a moment here. (YT please stop putting this shit on my front page I never watch them and you should know that) It has 204,897 views in the span of 4 days, and while YouTube has had far dumber things with way more views, that does not detract from the fact that a great number of people have in fact bothered to show interest in this kind of video. The video is titled "How to Recognize a Terrible Anime (in just one episode)"...meaning that it presumes that you are ill-equipped to actually do that by yourself (first-hand information) and thus need to have the way your beliefs are formed dictated by someone else. This can and will happen. The video has 7,536 likes and while I'm not going to bother reading the comments, chances are there are all kinds of people within the audience that aim to support the creator of these videos, Digibro, within a flame war because it also happens to have 2,091 dislikes, and from there I will bring up the next point of what makes social influence so powerful.

Chances are, the fans and haters of this YouTuber spend a whole lot more time talking shit about the other group within their group than they do talking shit toward each other. This will cause an overwhelming amount of second-hand information to enter some kind of insular circulation in which it will become repetitive and thus have a greater chance of entering memory as a concept worth keeping in mind, as well as reinforcing the importance of it each time they both meet resistance from the opposition and each time that provocation causes more repetitions within your own group beliefs. Why do they talk so much shit about the matter? Because there is no mental defense more powerful than a genuine sense of ridicule when the opposition has been encountered.

Now let us take a moment to observe this comment chain. There is only one person in it that is on the offense whereas everyone else is on the defense, as the kind of people who already watch the videos Metatron presents are the ones who would tolerate or like his look anyway. You may happen to find dIRECT0R to be an asshole, but I do believe it should be clear that most of the defense does not exactly look to be particularly respectable individuals, the one that does, is the one who, at face value, appears to have no acknowledgment of the offense at all. Reading just a little between the lines will make it clear that they are ridiculing dIRECT0R's statement nonetheless with how this comment chain is about appearance. In social contexts, humans tend to recognize that the one who does not falter at the sign of criticism is the one who has control over the situation, and the reason for this is because they are the ones who seem to be presenting more effective resistance to social influence. (I do not personally agree with this in terms of the actual consequences, because presenting no defense at all after noticing someone is how you get influenced to begin with.)

The third and last factor I will be speaking of in this first post (because you all know how it is with me and walls of text, I could definitely write more, but I probably lost your patience ages ago) are the relevance of labels to this entire phenomenon. If social influence is the attack, the label is the weapon designed for that purpose. This is because when you are put into a position where you are labled, someone else is deciding who you are. Now if we would go back to dIRECT0R's first comment that started the chain above, we would recognize that the first label he uses is a statement that claims Metatron is a weirdo and is thus avoided by a greater populace. Metatron himself is relatively fine with this in that he finds this label acceptable in favor of having to oblige to further social influence that would cause him to be something he doesn't want to be, however, it is clear that he has bothered to put up a defense regardless in order to ascertain himself of this. (Incidentially, part of why I write out these walls of text is so that I essentially have an archive to look back to to see how I personally think about things relative to a later point in time. They are walls indeed.) For the most part, the rest of dIRECT0R's statements are more descriptive than they are dictating, but then we come to another label that people simply cannot really fight against in the last comment of the chain, the claim that Metatron's fanbase are sycophants.

For as long as Metatron's supporters continue to come into the defense, they cannot convincingly invalidate this claim of their sycophancy, and it is at this point that it is clear the label is a weapon that is used to take control, and it is especially dangerous when circumstances hold that must have you refrain from coming to the defense of your self. It is those circumstances, being part of a certain group and not really being able to fight against it, that will cut deepest into the sense of self. At best, people can simply convince themselves someone isn't worth listening to, using a label that will help them in ridiculing the opposition, which on the internet, most frequently and iconically presents itself in the form of declaring someone to be a troll. However, this is not a viable option in situations where you are in direct opposition toward a person or group of respectable status, because when you try to use that means of assault, unless you have sufficient support from the group that is around you who is of similar respectable status, you will simply be ridiculed yourself, and your defense will not hold within the social context. Because politics form the conditions in which that does become a viable option, we end up with the situation where there is much shit flinging to be had, and because it is simply more comfortable, granting a sense of belonging (the reverse of ostracization) within the group that does not hold the beliefs your group is prepared to ridicule with good standing, you end up with a whole lot of talking shit indirectly instead of toward the face of the one they actually want to lack association with. This will of course form more developed opinions about the opposition without the opposition having a say to grant this development a new direction, and thus hatred grows and blinds itself, crushing your trust further and further for that opposition until they are no longer worth seeing beyond the fabricated image your group has manufactured through insular development.

As a result of this I personally believe that rather than putting the blame on self-centeredness, we should be well aware of the weaknesses of that very self-centeredness, so that we can make sure to avoid social influence that will strike into our hearts and change us for the worse. This is more of a problem with group mentality than it is with individual mentality. This isn't to say that I think all social influence should be avoided, because you can't, even I can't, and even I don't want to avoid all social influence, I just want to make sure that what I'm letting myself be is a direction I can trust and from a source that I don't mind being influenced by.

To sum it up, let's review the points made in this fortress of language:

Actor-observer bias will cause people to be self-centered no matter what. They have to be, otherwise the problem would be even worse than it is now.

There are two sources that influence belief and behavior, culture and experience.

Humans oftentimes lack sufficient first-hand information and thus allow for second-hand information to form the foundation of their beliefs.

Second-hand observation from the group that you find to be of greater credibility with what you already know will further reinforce the strength of your beliefs.

This second-hand observation(let us recall the first point made, this means that you refrain from even considering another as an actor like yourself) when met with opposition will only serve as a provocation to go even deeper into the group's own resistance toward the opposition within themselves. This removes even the benefit of gaining new information to potentially see that the opposition has a point worth listening to.

A genuine sense of ridicule toward a particular party will provide a stronger defense than anything against social influence from that source. (Likewise: a genuine sense of trust will grant the greatest weakness against social influence from that source.)

To use a label toward someone is to declare their identity. It is particularly effective when you do not provide an opening for their input.

Upon success, the label will in fact cause someone to take that into being part of themselves.

Understand just what it means to have strength in numbers in social contexts and why it makes people so stubborn.

Unless we come to the defense of our thoughts on a matter, we will falter and sublimate into something else, and that something else is what will add to the forces that decimate our trust in our own judgment in favor of trust formed through community. That's why we don't all get along and why we may not necessarily want to, such a passive attitude leads to making no difference but what others may do to you.

I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.

Humans are supposed to be so self-centered they cannot see anyone as a real person that they can't think of as being themselves.

I was going to debate this but then I realized I had no factual evidence that isn't my religion so I will just let it slide.

Let's have a look at this video's information for a moment here. (YT please stop putting this shit on my front page I never watch them and you should know that) It has 204,897 views in the span of 4 days, and while YouTube has had far dumber things with way more views, that does not detract from the fact that a great number of people have in fact bothered to show interest in this kind of video. The video is titled "How to Recognize a Terrible Anime (in just one episode)"...meaning that it presumes that you are ill-equipped to actually do that by yourself (first-hand information) and thus need to have the way your beliefs are formed dictated by someone else.

I hate that about youtube. You watch ONE VIDEO that someone linked you to, and suddenly it thinks OH HEY YOU LIKE THIS KIND OF STUFF RIGHT?!

The problem with this video is that it assumes everyone has the same idea of what terrible is. I for one have a very low stupidity tolerance (UNLESS we're talking about the sort of thing that is not taking itself seriously in the slightest, in which case there is usually plenty of snark to go along with it) so anime more geared towards children--who like this kind of stuff--grinds my nerves. This is best seen with the Pokemon anime. Look at how long it's been running. Yet the last time I watched an episode, I quit before the ten minute mark.

Back on topic, I was in such an "opposition ridicule" debate last night over something pretty stupid. It's a tutorial in Xenoblade Chronicles; in particular, the one for Visions and the Shield ability. At one point, it does this:

We all know how awful the human memory is at retaining the information provided in lists. I looked over this page, reading every bit of it, but 30 seconds later, after having gotten through the rest of the tutorial, I had already forgotten the contents of the list. What stuck in my mind was not "white arts are talent arts, which can be avoided with Shield," but rather that one of the things in the list had been red. Now we all know how many video games (and heck, even merc did it in his post) like to put the important information in bright red text. Even Xenoblade Chronicles does it:

So by the end of it all, what committed to memory was "talent arts are red."

My friend, however, having recently played through the game and saw the tutorial himself, immediately assumes that I wasn't paying attention at all during the tutorial. Because he saw the tutorial and better committed the information to memory, he assumed I would have done the same if I had read it. Except...I DID read it. I WAS paying attention. The information was just not properly stored in my brain, especially since there are 3 more pages of the tutorial slides to read before I get back to the game and experience it myself.

But you couldn't convince him of that. He was 100% convinced that I wasn't paying attention and that it had nothing to do with anything else. His attitude was a ridiculing one, which of course spiked me into self-defense mode. And thus a great, heated argument over something so stupid and unimportant was had.

Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 17 July 2016 - 05:09 AM

Now we all know how many video games (and heck, even merc did it in his post) like to put the important information in bright red text.

I just do that so that my self-commentary is obviously separate from the rest of the text, as I found that without doing that in a very large chunk of text I started finding it hard to even read what I wrote coherently myself. Though yes, it does stand out.

My friend, however, having recently played through the game and saw the tutorial himself, immediately assumes that I wasn't paying attention at all during the tutorial. Because he saw the tutorial and better committed the information to memory, he assumed I would have done the same if I had read it. Except...I DID read it. I WAS paying attention. The information was just not properly stored in my brain, especially since there are 3 more pages of the tutorial slides to read before I get back to the game and experience it myself.

But you couldn't convince him of that. He was 100% convinced that I wasn't paying attention and that it had nothing to do with anything else. His attitude was a ridiculing one, which of course spiked me into self-defense mode. And thus a great, heated argument over something so stupid and unimportant was had.

As unnecessary as I think ridicule would be in such a situation (because while I do think it is the strongest form of defense, that doesn't mean you have to go all out at any time) it does bear in mind that if they had just totally let it slide it would have probably left them feeling rather uncomfortable for not addressing something important they noticed and perhaps even confused over what actually is the right way of playing the game, so yes, your anecdote is a fairly good example to take into account for this kind of phenomenon and just how minor the circumstances can be to warrant it.

I was going to debate this but then I realized I had no factual evidence that isn't my religion

If I recall correctly you are a Christian and I believe Jesus Christ had claimed you should love your neighbor as you would yourself, which would present no contradiction to what I said. There are people out there who would even say that you should forgive others not for their sake but for your own, after all.

That said, Christianity also (should) believe that humans are depraved as a result of the original sin and the like...

I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.

I just do that so that my self-commentary is obviously separate from the rest of the text, as I found that without doing that in a very large chunk of text I started finding it hard to even read what I wrote coherently myself. Though yes, it does stand out.

Ah, yes. Smart choice.

As unnecessary as I think ridicule would be in such a situation (because while I do think it is the strongest form of defense, that doesn't mean you have to go all out at any time) it does bear in mind that if they had just totally let it slide it would have probably left them feeling rather uncomfortable for not addressing something important they noticed and perhaps even confused over what actually is the right way of playing the game, so yes, your anecdote is a fairly good example to take into account for this kind of phenomenon and just how minor the circumstances can be to warrant it.

The ridicule was the problem, totally. If he had merely pointed out that it was in the tutorial, it would be one thing. My response, of course, was not good either, getting offended at his belittling of me. Either way, yeah, good example of how quickly people can resort to insults/getting offended for stupid stuff.

We both apologized in the end so it's fine now.

f I recall correctly you are a Christian and I believe Jesus Christ had claimed you should love your neighbor as you would yourself, which would present no contradiction to what I said. There are people out there who would even say that you should forgive others not for their sake but for your own, after all.

That said, Christianity also (should) believe that humans are depraved as a result of the original sin and the like...

That is true. Humans are selfish by nature.

My problem was more with the wording than anything else. "Supposed to" kind of made it seem like humans SHOULD be that way, when in my opinion they ARE that way and they really shouldn't be. I mean, humans possess reasoning skills that many other creatures on Earth do not possess. Unfortunately, not all of us use these skills appropriately and some just completely ignore any sense of reason entirely because "screw that, I do what I want."

And some of us are just naturally more inclined to use reasoning than others. I for one have always been very logically-minded, but there are others who aren't that way and it's difficult (for me) to understand their actions sometimes because it just doesn't make sense to me. (But nobody ever said life had to make sense.)

I started reading but couldn't keep focused, I blame my ADD and general lack of intelligence, lol

I'm pretty sure that's everyone's reactions to Merc's posts. I only force myself to read it and post because I feel bad when nobody else bothers to read. (As a writer, I have friends who can't really be bothered to read my stories, so I know how it feels.)

Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 22 July 2016 - 07:52 PM

I'm pretty sure that's everyone's reactions to Merc's posts. I only force myself to read it and post because I feel bad when nobody else bothers to read. (As a writer, I have friends who can't really be bothered to read my stories, so I know how it feels.)

I happen to write these walls of text for myself as a learning experience of sorts, so it's not all that bad, but it does feel bitter when I know that I'm the start and end of the discussion, as that's quite limiting for obvious reasons. I considered writing in a blog before for this purpose but because of that lack of expectation for any response whatsoever I just couldn't bother (also because I know jack about HTML coding and can't figure out how to fix something Google changed on their end for no good reason) although it would give me an excuse to rave about things nobody else would find comfortable to actually discuss in the first place like why circumstances has made it so that the best relationship possible to conceive of for humankind is between a pretty older girl and a cute younger boy.

My problem was more with the wording than anything else. "Supposed to" kind of made it seem like humans SHOULD be that way, when in my opinion they ARE that way and they really shouldn't be. I mean, humans possess reasoning skills that many other creatures on Earth do not possess. Unfortunately, not all of us use these skills appropriately and some just completely ignore any sense of reason entirely because "screw that, I do what I want."

And some of us are just naturally more inclined to use reasoning than others. I for one have always been very logically-minded, but there are others who aren't that way and it's difficult (for me) to understand their actions sometimes because it just doesn't make sense to me. (But nobody ever said life had to make sense.)

I do believe they should be that way, the first post is all about how that self-centeredness of ours is a defense after all. Otherwise they risk falling into codependency, and because they don't truly lose their self-centered natures, even that is ultimately in self-interest. This is not an instinct reasoning can defeat, and reasoning should actually support its continued existence.

On the contrary I did believe myself to essentially embody all of what Corinthians 13:4-8 claimed when I was a little boy (the latter part of it describing why it fails occurred later on) but that was also when I was extremely self-destructive and sought someone else's judgment over my own because I couldn't trust myself outside of love and hatred for others. (ironically that idea that developed of what love should be is what made me as misanthropic as I am now though) I wanted to indulge completely in solace and gratitude so that I could essentially forget about myself. Ironically my preferences and beliefs as a child only strengthened ever further and reinforced with supporting ideas as I grew up though...

Incidentally, I find modern society's "why should you care about what anybody thinks, just do whatever you want" thing going for it is laughable at best. It is extremely likely to be completely destructive unrestrained (if you aren't considerate of others, what does it matter what happens to them?) and practically invalidated in purpose when it's followed up with "except all those things society tells you not to do or thinks is disturbing." The only ones that can actually achieve this ideal are ones that have been indoctrinated to the point where doing whatever they want makes no difference from what society wants out of them.

I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.

Incidentally, I find modern society's "why should you care about what anybody thinks, just do whatever you want" thing going for it is laughable at best. It is extremely likely to be completely destructive unrestrained (if you aren't considerate of others, what does it matter what happens to them?)

tbh I think that might be what's going on in our country right now. I haven't been paying much attention to the news but what I do know is that there's stupid violent protests and people getting killed. But that's besides the point and worth a topic of its own.

Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 23 July 2016 - 07:38 PM

tbh I think that might be what's going on in our country right now. I haven't been paying much attention to the news but what I do know is that there's stupid violent protests and people getting killed. But that's besides the point and worth a topic of its own.

I have doubts about that, primarily because those who usually go on to actually do such things are usually under a great deal of pressure and are essentially lashing out. This is most often towards what they consider to be oppression as uprisings in less developed countries and pretty much every fictional work about rebels and an empire will tell you. Whereas the United States basically exists with its freedom background and everything because they're British colonists that said fuck it to their homeland's way of doing things or something.

I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.

I couldn't read all this because there was just too much of it. I wanted to respond after a few sentences and kept reading, but found myself forgetting what I wanted to share. So please excuse me if I skip over most of it.

There is something you should consider when you think about oneself: you are never truly alone. The self exists in two forms; the physical and the mental or the ego (there is also the spirit, but I won't talk about this, that is for you and your family to discuss). You are experiencing life as an individual as it is intendended, the essential part of sharing and growing.

One thing I might suggest is research a little about narcissism, it might help you understand more about our current culture. We live in a place where convenience is everywhere and materialistic ideologies are foisted upon us. Many of us are so domesticated it is tough to imagine living any other way. The dependency on this lifestyle is actually what binds us. So many perverted truths separate individuals intentionally engineered to deviate young people. This is purposefully done so that you do focus on the self. It's a tough world and you'll notice the more you look into it, people who traded their lives for money, knowledge, and influence have lost their conscience. Unfortunately they lead the world and are what we call psychopaths.

The best thing you can know about the self is that you are. You are a living, breathing, feeling, sentient being. Love conquers all, we are all God's children. Be grateful for what is provided for you.

But back to the main subject. Opinions are just that: opinions. What you seem to be looking for is the truth. Instead perpetuating the expression of opinions have you tried telling the truth?

We are curious beings and there is a lot of esoteric knowledge being placed under our noses, so it's easy to get swept up in the hype of conversation and start blurting out opinions. In fact, that's how a lot of us have been raised. You've all heard of gossip; it's actually a sin. Just consider for a moment, a lot of people play video games. What is a common theme besides violence? Magic. What is magic? Everyone has heard of it. Let's say we have a conversation about call of duty and we boast about how good we are. Sure our skill might land us some infamy, but it doesn't mean we have actually killed someone. Our opinions on the subject have been conditioned from reality into a more controlled mainstream topic.

I hope you see what I'm trying to get across. What I think is going on, especially in these days, is; the self attempting to differentiate between the proposed reality and what we know to be true. Kind of like seeing beef already cut up and packaged at the supermarket and knowing it was once a living animal. We intuitively know better, but something wedged between me and you has us distracted by attractive phrasing and fast imagery. Just don't get me started on other temptations that take hold of other people's lives.

Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 29 July 2016 - 10:12 AM

But back to the main subject. Opinions are just that: opinions. What you seem to be looking for is the truth.

I am not.

You should be aware of the phrase: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me." It's bullshit. Or at least, if it isn't bullshit, it's telling you "Fuck everybody else, they're all dumbasses that aren't worth listening to."

Just as how we can be damaged physically, we can be damaged mentally. This damage becomes more severe the less one will defend their perception from the second-hand information of others, particularly so when someone is driven to become so submissive they will always refer to someone else to speak for them. (How many times have people quoted someone else's famous statement expecting that to be a sufficient answer for themselves...)

Let us take a fairly benign example, I am personally virtually a teetotaler. It was quite frequent that people would offer me alcohol or invite me to a place that primarily serves it, and I always refused. They demanded answers, they insured that it was of no harm, they claimed it was just to break the ice between me and them, they claimed that I may find a lot of hot girls to fuck at the joint, they claimed I need to man up and stop being so immature, they claimed my life would never be any fun if I would not expand my horizons and try a bit of risk every now and then. (I actually have drank wine before purely for the sake of educating myself on how it tastes in order to satisfy the curiosity I had over the daily cuisine of the ancient Romans, and use trace amounts of alcohol in cooking.)

I refused every single time regardless of the amount of social damage I would receive, even going as far as to belittle them in return if they were sufficiently persistent, because I did not want to lose control of my body in the presence of others. I also instinctively knew that if I would submit to their suggestions without regard to my aversion (the opinion) toward recreational drugs, it would become far easier for me to try again and for them to manipulate me into further becoming someone that they wanted me to be. Stockholm syndrome is a particularly specific example, which may not even require much intervention from the kidnapper, merely weakness from lack of mental defense in the victim.

If I were not as stubborn as I were, I would favor dogs over rabbits, chocolate over vanilla, guns over swords, denim jeans over camouflaged trousers, beer over non-alcoholic sparkling cider, sex over love, so and so on. My mentality has been challenged countless times over the years by others for preferences that should not even be of great notability given the ease of access I had to alternatives (except the last one mentioned) because others wanted me to fit their perception of what is right. They could have done it if I wasn't so hellbent on keeping my opinions. No one has ever told me I should prefer rabbits over dogs. Some are even bewildered that I like rabbits at all. Some try to claim that I actually like dogs and that I am just denying it to be a hipster. They will ask "Are you a cat person or a dog person?" and given the answer of "Neither, why is it always only those two?" they will show confusion in difficulty to think of any other possibility. It is just my natural inclination to prefer rabbits over every other animal (with the exception of particularly specific types of human) from what I have witnessed.

One thing I might suggest is research a little about narcissism, it might help you understand more about our current culture. We live in a place where convenience is everywhere and materialistic ideologies are foisted upon us. Many of us are so domesticated it is tough to imagine living any other way. The dependency on this lifestyle is actually what binds us. So many perverted truths separate individuals intentionally engineered to deviate young people. This is purposefully done so that you do focus on the self.

I do not believe modern culture to produce narcissists. It may seem to encourage them, but the so-called call for freedom and individualism is nothing but a vapid sham. There are very few who would actually practice the professed way of life we are supposed to follow, because it is unsustainable in the environment where it is actually present. If one were to actually focus on the self, they would easily reach the conclusion others are merely parroting what should be because of the contrast it holds to what they do. This is the result of aiming to please others in the social context they have been brought into, not a sincere ideology, but through that attempt to fit in, they gradually lose their individuality in favor of being safe from ostracization, forgetting what it is that makes themselves who they were.

It's a tough world and you'll notice the more you look into it, people who traded their lives for money, knowledge, and influence have lost their conscience. Unfortunately they lead the world and are what we call psychopaths.

Have they, now?

Is it the power they have gained that drives them to psychopathy, or is it merely that psychopaths happen to find the role attractive?

What if I told you that they often believe themselves to be of as great or better in moral excellence as any common man, but were inclined to take decisions that were not good for others by virtue of others' expectations of them? I find this to be a highly probable situation. The rich and noble are not portrayed as far more restrictive about the behavior they should take in society without reason.

I find it quite difficult to believe power has done anything to man but enable them to do as they would if they had the opportunity. What provides the incentive to keep to the popular morals of the time and place is little else than social influence, and if someone were to be put in an environment that influences them differently and encourages a more ruthless approach to life, what choices would make one comfortable simply differ.

I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.

Let us take a fairly benign example, I am personally virtually a teetotaler. It was quite frequent that people would offer me alcohol or invite me to a place that primarily serves it, and I always refused. They demanded answers, they insured that it was of no harm, they claimed it was just to break the ice between me and them, they claimed that I may find a lot of hot girls to fuck at the joint, they claimed I need to man up and stop being so immature, they claimed my life would never be any fun if I would not expand my horizons and try a bit of risk every now and then. (I actually have drank wine before purely for the sake of educating myself on how it tastes in order to satisfy the curiosity I had over the daily cuisine of the ancient Romans, and use trace amounts of alcohol in cooking.)

Had to look that word up. Now I know I'm a teetotaler too.

These guys don't sound like very good friends... but you never said they were friends, anyway.

Is it the power they have gained that drives them to psychopathy, or is it merely that psychopaths happen to find the role attractive?

..........

That is a very good point. I'll have to think about that one. lol

No one has ever told me I should prefer rabbits over dogs. Some are even bewildered that I like rabbits at all. Some try to claim that I actually like dogs and that I am just denying it to be a hipster.

...I think I'd prefer rabbits over dogs. But that's because I owned dogs before and I rarely had any good experiences with them.

Ok I read most of this but skipped over some....I made a huge part but my paged closed......dealting a huge chunk so instead ill get to my second point my first was how people treated me for things I did like my hair. and my belief and what I say like yall and aint. But besides that ill get to my second part of this sorry this is basically rambling but here we go

Ok you made the point of Love your Neighbor as you love yourself. I generally would use KJV but ill use NKJV and NLT references and say it normal not confusing as it may. for some of yall. It says Love your Neighbor as you love yourself. No commandment is greater then these. Jesus said this to his disciples. Weird right? Not really its normal but Jesus knows we humans as we are. Everything about it. It says that he knows us like every star in the sky and by every Single strand of hair on our head. Jesus Knew we had a selfish nature and that we do things for your own benefits and try defend and all that jazzy stuff. But that's why Jesus made that statement so his disciples can carry on that we can get rid of most selfishness and focus on people more then our Self( Trust me I get selfish its not easy not to sometimes) that's why he told them that. And made it greater then any other commandment. Like he said.

Then the sin nature oh that thing, that I hate so dearly much. Yes we are all born of sin and we can be saved and repent of our sins, but we continue to repent of our sins even after accepting Jesus and repenting of it. Due t the fact even after we are saved we will Sin and do things that aint Godly. Like I said I aint perfect may be in Gods eye but I do stupid things and I fail God, I fail Jesus. But in the end he loves me for who I am and helps me be in his image. Us humans are very different from creatures like Leafy said. We have a different thing about is. But sin corrupts the soul and body and kills you off(some may understand some may not it can go into spiritual stuff which I'm very similar in honestly) but in the bible it talks about how we are born children of Wrath by nature. Like look at a new born child it wines and everything else. It throws tantrums and all that other jazzy stuff. Its because it has wrath by nature(not trying t put down some babies but aint that the truth?) it grows up it grows less yes some people no they just have problems sadly hopefully they can be fixed one day but yeah I guess that's all. Tell me to stop if I make you feel uncomfortable with this Jesus talk this Christian talk and God talk.

Thirdly and lastly the thing we Psychotic people that kill( can't remember his name he carved a Nazi sign on him(which isn't really Nazi to begin with but adopted to it due to the fact Hitler found it in something and made it his symbol.) but that guy me I look at it that the person isn't themselves, that they are possessed by a Demon. Yes I believe demons are real obviously and yes demons can control people I know that first hand(i've witnessed before and yeah we had to deal with a guy who had a demon believe me or not and no I didn't use holy water or anything thing special I just called on the name of Jesus with my friends and said we command you in Jesus name to be gone. He left it was mind blowing for me) but yeah I feel like most people like that are possessed by a demon. opinion and makes since for me, but thanks for reading and like I said tell me to stop if you feel uncomfortable!